Talk:Heroes of the Storm
New Category needed We ought to make a Blizzard All-Star category to deal with items related to this. Alockwood1 00:22, May 13, 2012 (UTC) :I'm going to see if I can change those category names. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 01:14, May 13, 2012 (UTC) ::Looks like you did. Alockwood1 00:06, May 14, 2012 (UTC) Images I've just converted all the .TGA files in the press kit to JPGs, so I can start uploading images soon. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 18:06, June 1, 2012 (UTC) DOTA Trailer is private The trailer currently in the Notes section does not play and is marked 'private'. Clicking on the YouTube link takes you to a page which says you can only play that video if the uploader gave you access. It needs to be replaced by a public access copy. JediHistorian 06:55, June 20, 2012 (UTC) :Alright, I'll look for another version. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 12:02, June 20, 2012 (UTC) The BALS Issue This is an issue that's been simmering for a long time, but I figure it's time that we decide what's going to happen. The fact is, BALS has since been confirmed to be its own game. We know from Blizzard's job page that development overlaps with SC, but for all intents and purposes, it's become independent, and the refs I edited with confirm that. So, the question is, if BALS is its own game, and not just a mod, why is it here then? Or rather, why does BALS get its own articles whereas the Warcraft and Diablo pages, while relevant, are mostly confined to one article? I don't know, but while this is something the other admins will have to agree upon, I'd like to make the following contentions based on the following options: Option 1: BALS Info is Compressed/Removed/Transferred *Anything that originates from BALS that's said to be in the SC universe can stay (e.g. Leon - said to exist in SC, no reason to doubt its existence). *The BALS page should remain, regardless of what happens to its respective articles (similar to the WC and Diablo pages). Even if most of its content is removed, we can chart its development history. *SC heroes who appear in BALS should be noted as such in their respective articles, if only in "other appearences" sections (Raynor's made quite a few appearances outside SC for instance). Option 2: The Wiki Adapts to Cover BALS Info This is actually my preferred option for a no. of reasons. I would contend that the wiki should cover BALS info alongside that of SC, that while this should primarily remain the SC Wiki, BALS info should be given its place, albeit separated (e.g. keep article categories quite separate, overlap only when relevant). I believe this is the better COA because of the following: *De Facto Referencing: Type in Blizzard All-Stars into a search engine, this article comes up near the top. Look for a list of BALS heroes, this article is often listed on forums (and I've checked up on a few, this article comes up quite often). *Lack of Alternatives: There are indeed a few BALs wikis. Wikia has one, Gamepedia (a similar wiki platform) another. I've visited both, and they're effectively dead. This wiki has covered far more BALS info than either of them. We already have the structure in place to cover BALS. So as we're the de facto location, and already have the requisite info, we seem to be well placed to cover BALS info. *Precedents: Such a move is not without precedent. For instance, the Half-Life wiki covers both Half-Life and Portal material. The Last Airbender wiki covers material from both The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra. The Call of Duty wiki has given the zombies continuity (yes, it has a continuity) its own respective lore/canon pages. Admittedly, BALS is different. BALS is more akin to Super Smash Brothers is to Super Mario really, a different continuity despite shared characters, and while various Nintendo wikis have a section for SSB (covering a character's appearances in the game, such as Mario and Link), they've never based their wiki around it. But also unlike SSB, BALS was originally a mod for SC, so the hole was dug. For better or worse, we seem to be in the best place to stablizie it. Decisions So, to cover the options: Option A: Stay the course. Keep the BALS info. I've slightly edited the homepage to reflect this, and it would need to be taken off the maps template (not the games one I would argue though), but otherwise, we're already set to cover BALS. Option B: Remove/compress BALS info. A can of worms in itself, and it raises questions of where it would go, how easy it would be to transfer and whatnot. As stated, not the option I'm in favour of, but I can certainly understand some wanting this. After all, this is a SC Wiki. BALS is a MOBA, and fans of the two genres I notice aren't always reciprocal to the other. While I think BALS can be kept without jeprodizing the wiki so to speak, I can appreciate the other option. So, basically, that's my position, and I've already done some edits to reflect it. But given the nature of said decision, I figured it should be given the chance for discussion.--Hawki (talk) 03:36, September 16, 2013 (UTC) :I'd rather go with option A. We already have a "DotA" template (we probably need to rename that) and category, and can make All-Stars versions of each hero/unit that exists in both All-Stars and StarCraft. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 13:47, September 16, 2013 (UTC) ::As in, create separate categories based on appearances? E.g. a Jim Raynor article and "Jim Raynor (All-Stars)" or something to that effect? Think that would be a good idea actually, though characters such as Leon can probably stay in one article given that BALs introduced them (unless they make actual SC appearances).--Hawki (talk) 14:04, September 16, 2013 (UTC) Mentions Diablo isn't mentioned here (should be under Warriors), the Faerie dragon is named Brightwing and the Ogre Ninja is named Dagg'um Ty'gor. This whole section is quite out of date.. --L3monsta (talk) 04:06, March 10, 2014 (UTC)L3monsta :Added Diablo. I'd need proof of the ogre/faerie dragon names.--Hawki (talk) 04:39, March 10, 2014 (UTC) ::The name Brightwing has been datamined: ::http://www.heroesnexus.com/news/26-a-challenger-appears-brightwing-the-faerie-dragon ::I read somewhere that the proposed Ogre Ninja was this guy: ::http://wowpedia.org/Dagg%27um_Ty%27gor ::But I can't find the source. Thanks for adding Diablo.-- 07:47, March 11, 2014 (UTC)L3monsta :::I've converted the FD to Brightwing. However, I'd rather leave Tygor out for now. He may indeed be Tygor, but if that's the case, I'm left to ask why "Ninja Ogre" was used by Blizzard in the first place. Not to mention it's a character that was only listed as possible, not outright shown. I'd rather wait on that for now.--Hawki (talk) 21:02, March 11, 2014 (UTC) Removal? Okay, I admit that I kinda dug my own grave here, but I'm beginning to wonder...is there a need for this page and its content here anymore? I bring this up with the following points in mind: *I certainly think a HotS page is worth keeping on this wiki, in order to list StarCraft aspects (similar to how Wowpedia has a HotS page which focusses on Warcraft aspects), along with how we have a Warcraft and Diablo page. That, and since the game started off as a SC mod, it would be worth keeping its history up to the point of it becoming its own thing. *There are currently at least three other wikis for the game, one of which is wikia based. There are far more specialized wikis to cover the game rather than this wiki having to cover it also, not to mention the whole concept of 'stealing the spotlight'. *The game is progressing far too quickly to cover...for me personally at least. I'm an admin of 2 wikis (this and the Diablo one) and RoS has kept me busy in the latter case, but SC is in a lull right now, and even then, there's SC-exclusive stuff that still needs editing. I feel HotS is sticking out as a sore thumb on this wiki that at this point in time, should focus on StarCraft. Plus, in the event of there being LotV info at some point (by the end of this year is my guess), and under the assumption that HotS will continue to develop and add more heroes...I think it's really too much to cover. *In the event that the two are separated, I think HotS material can still have articles here to an extent. E.g. Sgt. Hammer can have an article as per her character bio (has a surname and forename, forget what they are right now) puts her as a K-sector veteran. So yeah. In conclusion, I feel that the game has reached the point where it no longer has enough specific relevance to SC to warrant it being covered here. For those who don't care about the game and only SC, no biggie, that's presumably why you come to the wiki. For those who do care about HotS and want to edit for it, other wikis exist to cover that. Thoughts?--Hawki (talk) 02:37, March 27, 2014 (UTC) :I'm crushed at work until this May, hence the lack of appearances here. It seems you've been doing all the work on HotS by yourself. I guess it boils down to... how good is the HotS Wikia? If it's good, we can offload material there and only give basic info about StarCraft-related mechanics. If it's terrible, we should keep at it, if it's possible. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 12:45, March 27, 2014 (UTC) ::My first trip to the HotS Wikia shows it as pretty impressive. They're missing references though. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 12:48, March 27, 2014 (UTC) :::Of the three wikis listed, the third one is pretty much dead. Of the gamepedia and wikia ones, I'm more mixed. IMO, the gamepedia one covers gameplay elements better, but the wikia one covers skins and character bios better, along with covering some cut content. The wikia one would be the preferred wiki to offload material for though. A lot of it has been ported over, including our edits (you might have noticed you have over 2000 edits on your page there, courtesy of porting from this wiki), so under the principle that we're already wiki users, it would be relatively easy to go through each HotS article we have, go to the HotS wiki, and add/alter/ref as we go through. Not that I'm too worried about refs admittedly for the HotS wiki as most of it would come from the game itself. Most refs would be development based, and as stated earlier, I think we can keep its dev history on this wiki. :::Anyway, plenty of time to make a decision.--Hawki (talk) 13:04, March 27, 2014 (UTC) ::::Maybe it's an oddity, but they actually removed a few references there. We don't control their policies though. Funnily enough, Heroes of the Storm is listed as one of my "favorite" wikis even though I've only made one real edit there. ^^ Also noticed one of the non-Wikia ones posts a lot of data mined content, which is probably against Blizzard policies. ::::If we choose to transfer things over, we'll need to link them to our front page (and ask them to do the same for our page), then modify our Heroes of the Storm pages, perhaps with a template, to theirs. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 23:16, March 27, 2014 (UTC) :::::I figure that when data was transferred from here, our edit history was as well. E.g. Fenix got an article, so every edit we made on his page was added to our edit history for the wiki, and added to our edit count. After all, mine's in the hundreds and yours is in the thousands for said wiki. :::::I'm not sure about the necessity of linking though - I figure it would be all or nothing. Get the data over, and once that's done, start removing it from here, and use wikia links for a HotS page on this wiki, and for each SC hero that appears in the game, have a note (e.g. "Raynor appears as a playable hero in Heroes of the Storm), with the "Raynor" part linking to his HotS page. If we're keeping individual pages here, I figure we should work with them. Either give (insert hero here) everything about said hero, or not at all.--Hawki (talk) 23:42, March 27, 2014 (UTC) ::::::Truth be told, having second thoughts. I did a user page to list every article that lists to HotS, and I figure the amount of time it'll take to get the HotS pages over would take longer than updating the ones that need updating.--Hawki (talk) 07:44, March 28, 2014 (UTC) :::::::We have linked a lot of Warcraft-influenced pages (eg fel orcs, etc), so I don't see why we couldn't link. At the moment transferring info might be difficult, but as the game info expands, we won't be able to keep up. It seems the other wiki is just taking stuff anyway. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 13:23, March 28, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::The difference is that the links mentioned usually have some bearing on SC. Space fel orc, can make the firebat connection. Orcs and elves have the portrait connection. Even Diablo arguably has some connection given his unit cameo in WoL. However, there's an issue with articles such as, say, Tyrael or Brightwing. They have no connection to SC or the days of Blizzard DotA/All-Stars (as opposed to, say, Muradin, who had a marauder skin back then). So I'm not sure how such articles could really be justified in the SC sense. I'm fine with individual 'influenced articles' (as in, stemming from Blizzard's other franchises), but in the case of HotS, I don't think every hero can really be 'justified.' At the least, I don't think every HotS hero can justify a place on this wiki if we do shift, and those that do need a strong case for it, especially when they can be incorporated into a pre-existing article (e.g. Raynor, Kerrigan). ::::::::Anyway, looked at the wiki again. Provided it is able to format hero abilities (e.g. its Tychus article - missing the skill tree, but the format itself shows itself to work), then it could be a good dumping ground. If we do agree to shift though, I'm inclined to go back to the list I attempted - every HotS-related article, and we can decide what stays.--Hawki (talk) 21:49, March 28, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::Created an article that lists every HotS article there is. Recomends fate of each one. Some would be cut, some would be merged/noted (e.g. every SC character can have a noted presence). If we do merge/move, my plan would be to go through each one, get it to the new wiki (or make sure it's already there), then once that's all done, carry out a mass deletion here. Course I'll wait for agreement before carrying that out.--Hawki (talk) 07:48, March 29, 2014 (UTC) Decision (So I can have a left orientation again) So, have we made a decision? I'll start transferring the data in the near future, but whether we keep it or not/how much we keep is still to be decided.--Hawki (talk) 22:06, March 31, 2014 (UTC) :Transfer of data has been completed. I've listed every HotS article that will have to be removed or altered. I hope to do this in a single sitting - when, I don't know exactly, but not earlier than 4 days from now. There seems to be no objection based on the above conversation (or lack of it), but if it does exist, say so now.--Hawki (talk) 02:59, April 18, 2014 (UTC) ::Agreeing with everything from the discussion, Heroes' info must be passed to its own Wikia. Just a point of view, obviously every Hero from StarCraft should have an individual hero page, but every StarCraft reference that comes from the mixes in Heroes of the Storm should stay too. by that I mean, Uther's medic skin, Naziba with a zergling skull on his hip during dev time, Stitches many StarCraft skins, Grunty, ETC, and whatever they think on doing next too... CombatMagic (talk) 08:05, April 18, 2014 (UTC) :::I disagree that every SC character needs a separate HotS page. It's certainly worth noting (see here for an example, but it's not worth creating a separate article for stuff that's already covered in-depth elsewhere. As for other elements, my view is to take a similar approach as done here, listing SC elements on the HotS page. This would include the heroes list, and also elements (Uther in the medic armor, the zergling skull, etc.)--Hawki (talk) 10:54, April 18, 2014 (UTC) ::::'Kay, I'm going to begin the deletion process within 7 hours time unless something drastic happens. Final chance to voice disagreement.--Hawki (talk) 07:06, April 22, 2014 (UTC) :::::Begun process. Been interrupted right now due to circumstances beyond my control. Intend to resume within the next 3-4 hours.--Hawki (talk) 09:24, April 22, 2014 (UTC) ::::::And...finished. Dunno if it's necessary to list every SC element, focussed on heroes. Can be added later if needed.--Hawki (talk) 13:25, April 22, 2014 (UTC) Info from Heroes canon to Starcraft or not? I noticed there was an article about the Executor's Regala skin on the site here. Is it fine if we incorporate some info from Heroes of the Storm here when it's about StarCraft? Like say, the psionic abilities shown, the non-silly alternate skins, how modified a Siege Tank can get, etc. --Shadow Archon (talk) 07:47, May 9, 2015 (UTC) :HotS is a bit of a fine line, and at some point I'll have to draft a canon policy as to how we address it. But basically it boils down to the following: #HotS in of itself is non-canon (this has been stated by devs, so as such, we can't say "at some point Raynor entered the Nexus.") #HotS' own lore is based on the idea of alternate realities, so that versions of the same character can come from more than one setting (e.g. the high templar Zeratul skin, or the pharoh Tassadar one). In such cases, these should not be included. #Information can be inserted into the wiki when it's applied to the core setting/character, provided it does not contradict anything from said setting/character. However, where possible, it should be designated with the respective template (e.g. how the regalia article has the ambig canon template). This can include individual article sections (e.g. Zeratul, per his master skin lore). So for instance, taking Nova, it's permissable to take info from her base skin and master skin, as the former is plain Nova, and the latter is based on the Crius stealthsuit, which already exists. However, there shouldn't be articles for her spectre form or roller derby skins as these are based on "what if?" scenarios. However, if the spectre variant included exclusive info on spectres itselves, then it would be permissable to add the information in of itself. #In the case of heroes like Sgt. Hammer, like the regalia, it's okay to include an article, provided it makes it clear through the template that this is a character from HotS and whatnot. :I'd say it's mostly a case of common sense. Granted, there's some fine lines to walk, such as infested Tychus. Technically, him becoming infested doesn't contradict anything in SC, but it does inevitably change perceptions about the character, and his infobox. But most of the time, it's a case of "the serious is fine, the silly isn't."--Hawki (talk) 10:20, May 9, 2015 (UTC) :Thanks. That's very informative. When I get the time, I'll probably add some info from the hero abilities. :Would you rather wait to add info from the abilities/traits after the official release? That way, there's less worrying about changing a few articles if something is cut/edited before the final release. --Shadow Archon (talk) 02:45, May 10, 2015 (UTC) :Traits/abilities are fine to add in theory, as even if the trait is removed, it would get the "previous version" template. Even if Raynor's Hyperion move was removed for instance, the Hyperion article would still mention that it appeared in HotS, even if that's no longer the case.--Hawki (talk) 06:14, May 10, 2015 (UTC) Missed info StarCraft Elements > Heroes > Gabriel Tosh isn't in HotS Units > MULE is in the game (summoned by various heroes) Spider Mines (summoned by Sgt.Hammer) I'll add another missing info or point wrong info when I'll find it. 19:39, May 26, 2015 (UTC) Crossover into Starcraft? I was wondering whether we could add characters that have alternate skins in the Starcraft setting, such as Uther as a Medic or Illidan as a Spectre. JediHistorian (talk) 05:58, June 19, 2015 (UTC) :Not as characters, no. I'm fine with notes in the respective articles (e.g. "a medic skin appears in HotS as a skin for Uther" or whatnot), but character articles is going a bit far, especially since there's already a HotS wiki, with the old character articles transferred to it.--Hawki (talk) 06:21, June 19, 2015 (UTC) Kerrigan summoning zerglings As far as I know, there is no such talent by Kerrigan as for now. Was it a talent that appeared in early builds and is currently removed? Nonexist (talk) 15:53, January 19, 2017 (UTC) :Yeah just looked it up, last July they removed the Impaling Swarm talent. But they're still on Braxis Holdout, probably best just to mention that appearance. Subsourian (talk) 16:26, January 19, 2017 (UTC) ::I finally decided to add it to the Removed content section. Nonexist (talk) 15:49, March 4, 2017 (UTC) Original or not? To talk about the question. Probius is make no sense to be considered original, he appeared for the first time in LotV, so he is original from SC, not from Heroes. For Morales... I'm in doubt... technically she appreared in SC, so, MAYBE her too must be considered original from SC? Not sure... but Probius there is not doubt, just because they didn't revealed his name, he still appeared there as a character. Morales was just a unit, so, for her I can understand the doubt, but not for him. Let's take an exemple. The Zergling with the scar of Heart of the Swarm. He is a character, he have a page here, so if Blizzard make him a hero with an official name you will consider him to be a original hero from Heroes just because we didn't know his name? This is quite dumb, if he is a character appeared for the first time in SC, even if nameless, his original appearence as a character was made in SC, not in Heroes.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 20:14, December 21, 2017 (UTC) :The issue I have is Morales is the same was as Probius, in that she is supposed to be one of a specific unit in To Chain the Beast (notably one of the four medics you use on the Overmind). We made an article for Scar because he appeared in StarCraft II and was relevant to the story arc of Kerrigan. In this case, everything we know about the probe comes from Heroes of the Storm. We haven't, for example, made articles for the group of zealots or the archon that followed Probius around. Probius is an odd case because technically the only canon thing is the fact a probe appeared in LotV. :It blurs the line, but if I had my way we wouldn't even put in the original character distinction. But the reason I'm so anal about it is people point to the fact we have an article as a "well the wiki has an article on Probius that must mean he has been a long established character!" and I would rather dissuade them of this. But again, since Probius is similar to Morales in that they are supposed to be a specific unit that normally went unnamed, we either list all as original, unlist the two of them or say to hell with listing any as original, which given how grey the area's gotten I'm leaning toward that last one. --Subsourian (talk) 21:32, December 21, 2017 (UTC) ::But Morales was a unit in all aspects, Probius don't, he appeared in a cinematic, we didn't make a page for him because we don't, but the Zergling we do, and, stay near to Kerrigan for a lot of time (not even so much, since he just appear in 3 cinematics for really little time) is not "relevant". ::Maybe the most correct thing to do is remove original character to Probius and add "semi-original character" to Morales, since... yhea, she appeared in BW for the first time, but as a unit, so she made her debut as a character in Heroes, but her TRUE debut was in BW.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 21:39, December 21, 2017 (UTC) :::I'm more in favor of listing them as original characters. Probius is retroactively added to LotV via HotS, but there's nothing in LotV to suggest that the probe itself is anything special. Same way Morales is retroactively added to BW via her lore. Hammer is likewise original. Maybe not in the same way in that her addition wasn't retroactive, but original all the same. Unless there's something to suggest that the LotV team had some idea for Probius that the HotS team appropriated, rather than it being the other way round, I think "original character" is a good descriptor.--Hawki (talk) 21:48, December 21, 2017 (UTC) ::::And again, the same I can say for the Zergling we see with Kerrigan, he is just a Zergling that was with Kerrigan, never do something important, but still the wiki consider him a character. Is this the difference, retroactively or not, that character still appeared BEFORE Heroes. I can even accept Morales since her appeared like a regular unit, but not Probius, he was in the intro of LotV.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 23:00, December 21, 2017 (UTC) :::::Well, there's almost certainly never going to be a zergling hero, and in that specific case, it's not so much the wiki considering him a character per se, it's just giving him an article because that same zergling keeps popping up. If he did become a character, that would be iffy. But the difference is, again, that zergling keeps popping up in HotS. Probius is a probe that briefly appears in a cutscene in LotV, and never appears again. It's HotS making him a character on its own terms, rather than taking a character from LotV. Without HotS, there'd be no Probius article, or "LotV probe character" article. With the zergling, he'd exist as an article regardless of what Heroes does.--Hawki (talk) 02:30, December 24, 2017 (UTC) ::::::I am absolutely not convinced, Probius in any case appeared for the first time in LotV, name or not name, Morales I can also understand, because of the four Medics the question of "which of the four?" it is legitimate, and has appeared as a unit not as a character in some scene, so I think it is an error to leave Probius considered as an original HotS character. ::::::And even though Zergling has appeared several times, there are pages of characters that have been written for MUCH less, like the Marine tiki that appears in the non-canonical mission where it is to sabotage Tosh's plans with Nova. That is, from this point of view, Probius deserved a page much more than the Marine tiki, since it played a key role in events intro, the Zergling appears randomly, and the Marine tiki literally does not do anything.--PRISON KEEPER (talk) 09:19, December 24, 2017 (UTC) :::::::We're getting off track with characters like the zergling and marine tiki, since the issue isn't about notability, it's about origin. And by that, Probius can't be said to originate from SC. I mean, technically the probe that provided the basis for him did, but he didn't exist as a character in any shape or form. Part of Probius's backstory states that he gained his personality by entering the Nexus. And again, we can't say whether the HotS team took inspiration from the probe for Probius, or created Probius first and then grafted it onto the probe in question. Since the probe doesn't do anything to stand out on its own terms, I'd say the latter.--Hawki (talk) 10:49, December 24, 2017 (UTC)